Messages

Proving that body wood has a resonant frequency is only proof that body wood has a resonant frequency (which, as far as I know, nobody is arguing); it's not proof of body wood affecting the tone of a solid body electric guitar.  You're just saying that it has to make a difference without any evidence that it actually does.

Hi and thanx for reply. From my point of view, sorry but yes, you are a bit late tot the party, i have allready left (see post above)! But i can reply to your meta-comment quoted in-parenthesis above:

No, on the contrary it seems like quite many is arguing about that. In the report earlier linked (the only university report seen in this thread so far, and its quite poor) one of the statements really are "a solid guitar body has no resonance at all". Wrong. Also, the guy in the video (Gledisons link) really need unresonating guitarwood if the formulas he's showing as "proof" shallnot run amok. So, its good that you have no problem accept that solid guitarwood (necks, bodies) really does resonate. From there, the following question should be: "What happens if a piece of matter with a given resonance frequencey meets a string vibrating with the same frequency?" There is answers to that question, but again, sorry, im out!

And please don't tell me i am running out of evidence; i dont need that.

Cheers and happy playing!
/Bengt

I would love to go for the Voodoo side of the force

Yay! Did I just become a voodoooist?! 

I think there is enough evidence allready. I posted two short soundclips earlier showing different resonance for different woods. And the guy in your video unproof himself by showing that a heavier wood gives longer decay. What more do we need?

Another thing about the video; the guy sais that the material of the bridge makes difference. yes. of course it does. There is an interface where the string meets the bridge which is important. Then, in next interface the bridge meets....the body! Now, how can that interface be of no importance?  It might be less, but not none. No, it does not make sense. In a SCIENTIFIC perspective .

Cheerio

Hey voodoo child!
I think the guy said that there will be diff in decays and this will alter the sustain, but not the tone.
Man, there are really a lot of discussions out there( u tube r the best ones). Please check it out a video of a guy (DKGCustom). He build a strat in MDF and he compares with a solid body strat showing the signal using a software. No really differences.
A good point for the discussion would be why 3D printed guitars or acrylic sound quite nice?
To be honest it need to see comparing the signals.because my ears are not sensitive enough ( tone dead?    )
Cheers

Hehe, i'm back. and i'm out... For three days i got a bit dedicated... read through the earlier posted reports and found som 50 wrongs to pick on ... then i watched that first guy's video and got a bit pissed (posted above). Then i watched 40 minutes DKGCustom making a guitar body of a dinner table in particleboard, and read 10-15 comments. And... i just got deadly bored of the whole discussion ... is "jejune" a good word to use here?

It's like two guys discussing coca cola vs coca cola zero.
1: This sugared one taste so much better!
2: Nope, they taste the same, no difference at all!
1: Hell no! Use your taste buds fgs! Its like heaven and hell!
2: They taste absolutely the same. I can prove it! By SCIENCE! Look! Both are BLACK and have the same DENSITY!
1: Hermehhh.. no, they look and maybe smell the same but one of them taste SHIT!
2: the carbon composition of aspartame is the same as in SUGAR! I can prove it by MEASUREMENTS!
1: now wait a minute, i can do a chemical analysis and show that they are DIFFFERENT!
2: No, you can't prove it! Look at my results! Yea some ppl live their myth. I'm the SCIENTIST!
1: I don't need your measured results to convince my taste...

......... nope i'm out.

**********
It's been said earlier, can be said again: What a great forum this is; where theres no intention at all to let a subject like this - which obviously has caused heavy slanging matches out there - pass the dirty line (now if that makes sense in english? you get what i mean)

And hey Gledison! No offence at all (but your didn't read it that way huh?)
...and hope i didnt offend anyone either. If so, please tell me and i will apologize!

Now back dreaming of my upcoming build with a body in BLACK KORINA!

Cheerio!

I think the guy said that there will be diff in decays and this will alter the sustain, but not the tone.

Yes. Difference in sustain is difference in sound response. We have to agree on that.
.. and i dont see any contradiction in that synthetic guitars may sound good as well. I'm not read up much on them though. Does all synthetic guitars sound exactly the same, or are there differences among them too? With todays techniques i guess its all possible to make some kind of "perfect soundwood" of composite.

Bedtime! Ill be back! Cheerio! Tjing!
/VöödööBëngt

I would love to go for the Voodoo side of the force

Yay! Did I just become a voodoooist?! 

I think there is enough evidence allready. I posted two short soundclips earlier showing different resonance for different woods. And the guy in your video unproof himself by showing that a heavier wood gives longer decay. What more do we need?

Another thing about the video; the guy sais that the material of the bridge makes difference. yes. of course it does. There is an interface where the string meets the bridge which is important. Then, in next interface the bridge meets....the body! Now, how can that interface be of no importance?  It might be less, but not none. No, it does not make sense. In a SCIENTIFIC perspective .

Cheerio

@Vallhagen
I realize that it was not the full study. I thought it read something more in depth, but I haven't found it again. 

No worries. I have searched too, and didnt find it either. Not every student report makes "google daylight".

Cheerio.

This is a Long debate.
I've found this video, which is a bit long, but the guy shows the physics equations and what really affects the guitar frequencies.
Just to spicy it up a bit ! In the end, he compares experimentally 3 diff woods types.
I know there is a lot of Voodoo out there but I will stick with this untill someone proves otherwise!
http://youtu.be/svmOQuNC1Uw

Crap. i wrote a fairly long reply and then computer froze in the middle of it! so... starting over...

I watched the video. a bit tiring long hour, but im through it. Im not sure which is worse; the scientific playground or the voodoo kindergarden, though i spend more time in the first mentioned. This guy has read some course about wave propagation and stuff but i assume he didnt take the second course. He shows us the math for the string, but not for the wood. We may assume that he finds such math is a bit complex, and its easier to just skip. By skipping this he simplifies the wood of the guitar to some matter that is 100% undynamic and stiff. And tree is not (we can bend a neck, right). We always do simplifications when we make theory of reality, but we gotta be careful about what to simplify. So; Watch him as a voodooist dressed up as a math teacher, thats a good starting point. By false math you can "prove" a lot. I actually go a bit provoked by him claiming "this is pure science", when he misses so much.

A few examples of things that makes him wrong:

He actually claims that theres no such thing as cancellation of waves (or rather, he claims that the cancellation of waves does not have any impact when it comes to sound). It is funny becouse he really showes one effect of wave cancellation early in the video. I mean: When destructive interference (cancellation) occur, of course there is an impact of sound. This can be useful: There are sound systems based on destructive interference in some civil aircraft out there, designed for cancellation of cabin noise, and they indeed do their job. He's own example about two ppl on the beach not cancelling (no shit!) out the spoken word is most stupid.

He completely ignore to talk about the resonance of the body and neck. If the body-neck resonance is close to the played note's resonance they are most likely to partly cancel out. This happens, but the risk is higher for lower notes and may be more actual for electric basses than guitars. Fact: Every piece of matter (in this case, a guitar body and neck) that responds with sound when you tap it, indeed does have a resonance.

Then he claims that there really are difference (notice that!) between the woods: When it comes to note decay (sustain). But his conclusion is that the wood doesn't make any difference? I'm like... wtf?? Then he shows sound examples, but he does NOT let the tone ring out, because then the audience will hear the difference(!!!)... But hey, this means that he says there is a difference, right? Contradiction anyone??? Who is he fooling?

On the other end of sustain, there is attack. he doesnt adress that either.

He does not adress the frequency dependency of decay either. That is timbre for sure.

He's "guitar dummys" could be a good starting point for a more serious experiment. But from what i can see, they are 1) thicker than a common electric guitar body, and 2) they have no neck. So they should be closer to eachother soundwise than three "real guitars" of different wood.

Another contradiction: He states clearly that he does NOT talk about hollow-body guitars. But hey: Assume he is correct, then his conclusion should also prove that there is no difference between hollow-bodied guitars and solid guitars either, as (he's argument) the pickup really picks up electromagnetic waves (which of course is true) and is not affected by acoustic sound.

I could go on...

***
Its funny, before i read this thread, i really wasn't aware that there is an infected debate about this out there. But as i now look around (ive had nothing better to do, being stuck at home with a cold for some days), i have still NOT found anything that seriously shows or supports the idea that "there is no difference between soundwoods". There is a lot of "voodoo-mythical arguments" out there of course, but there are likewise pretty much semi-skilled "anti-voodooism" goin on as well. Throwing 3-4 simple physician formulas on a whiteboard doesnt impress me much more than the voodooists.


*****

Hey Gledison! Time to change foot again, right!!!

Cheerio!

In many cases (in this too, i guess), the choice of electrolytic or tantalum caps is based on available surface. They can be made physical small for larger capacitance.  More convenient for the design.

You can always replace a tantalum with an electrolytic, and you can also always replace it with a film cap (but NOT always the other way around!!). Just check the voltages for the caps, but its rearely an issue in 9V pedals. There are some discussions however changing cap type will affect the sound, i will not go into that discussion here.

Cheerio

@ crashguitar; The link is to a short artcle from -12, and states that a study is goin on.

"Mr Angove hopes to complete his research by the end of the year."

.. Is There a finnished report?

... Im on cellphone, can hardly copynpaste... Maybe i can find something by searchin myself. Ill be back!

I used to be of that opinion until I saw the results of some empirical tests (ie: ones not influenced by the human ear).

... im joining in here. I would like to see that test. Can i ask you for a link to the report?

***

Not sure i have followed all details in the discussion, but if i read you right, i have to say that you are wrong. Wood makes difference. If that difference is big or small (and worth the effort to run for better woods) may be a bit of healthy discussion, but that there is at least some difference is indeed quite obvious.

Of course the other gear (hardware etc) makes some difference too. Everything does. But basically we have a resonating thing - the guitar - and the thing that resonates is the wood (neck and body) together with plucked strings.

I had a friend who a few years back completely killed his instrument by spraypainting it with wrong quality color. It affected - the resonance of the wood parts.

Proof, compare the sound of two guitar necks with different wood:
http://www.frudua.com/suoni/alti/hpimo853.mp3
http://www.frudua.com/suoni/bassi/hpim883.mp3
..you dont need instruments to measure the difference. Im not really a sound gury myself but this one is obvious. And if those necks sound different when tapped, they will sound different when stringed.

... then, of course, different pickups makes huge difference too. So do choice of microphones when you record singers. But then, we have to agree that there are - in the first place - different quality in singers.

Cheerio

Been a while, and im pretty sure ive shown it in some earlier "mistake-thread"... but this is... hrrm... a bit of a mistake

... i find it enuff with 7mm for the 16mm alpha pots.

Also, vernier caliper is a very useful tool in cases like this.

Cheers

Let me know what he thinks!

Absolutely:). He's away til Friday, so you have to be patient til upcoming weekend with the response though;)

Cheerio

Ah, mr Anthony! I'm quite excited watching your result:) ... and your version of the artwork is indeed cool! Very artistic and made with great respect of the original. I'll definitely show it to "my origin artist"

Cool that you solved the pot positioning your own way as well.

Allover, im impressed! Now you just need that quad-thing-IC to rock it!

(and hey, I don't care much for battery power either... I can get a quality wallwart for the price of three 9V batteries... a bit of a no-brainer. I have actually never tried to run the Blüe Monster on batteries).

Keep up the good work!
Cheers
Bengt

Man, i want a yellow Gibson Explorer. You don't happen to have one layin around somewhere, and for sale?

Cheers

..didnt know about this as news... there are a few older Narnia movies out there isnt it? Links?

Edit: And yes, i absolutely loved those books! Beautiful fantasy stories for ... kids and elder:)